standard milspec 1911a1 frame has been proven to be able to survive firing 80,000 mil spec 45 acp loads before major frame destruction, ie cracking where the slide stop goes through the frame renders the gun unusable. The same frame has been tested out at 35-40,000 standard issue .40sw.

Plastic is far weaker. Once almost bought a EAA witness polymer gun in 40sw to carry out and about. Choose a revolver when I could pull the pistol out of the holster at the gun store counter and point it at a target on the store wall, and the same amount of force needed to activate a 1911 grip safety was enough force to CRUSH the plastic grip into the magazine. That crushing put so much force on the magazine it couldn't be removed or inserted. And following year EAA started redesigning their guns for stamped sheet steel reinforcements to deal with that issue.

Sure they have done major testing as far as round count goes with Glock and other plastic guns, but I don't trust them at all. Why? testing standards are meaningless. if they used FULL POWER ammunition that's one thing, but if they do the standard "gun shoots great with .32 wadcutters, so the 10mm auto version should be GREAT with full power hunting loads" crap